Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Med Virol ; 92(9): 1671-1675, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32330291

RESUMO

A pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been spreading throughout the world. Though molecular diagnostic tests are the gold standard for COVID-19, serological testing is emerging as a potential surveillance tool, in addition to its complementary role in COVID-19 diagnostics. Indubitably quantitative serological testing provides greater advantages than qualitative tests but today there is still little known about serological diagnostics and what the most appropriate role quantitative tests might play. Sixty-one COVID-19 patients and 64 patients from a control group were tested by iFlash1800 CLIA analyzer for anti-SARS CoV-2 antibodies IgM and IgG. All COVID-19 patients were hospitalized in San Giovanni di Dio Hospital (Florence, Italy) and had a positive oro/nasopharyngeal swab reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction result. The highest sensitivity with a very good specificity performance was reached at a cutoff value of 10.0 AU/mL for IgM and of 7.1 for IgG antibodies, hence near to the manufacturer's cutoff values of 10 AU/mL for both isotypes. The receiver operating characteristic curves showed area under the curve values of 0.918 and 0.980 for anti-SARS CoV-2 antibodies IgM and IgG, respectively. iFlash1800 CLIA analyzer has shown highly accurate results for the anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies profile and can be considered an excellent tool for COVID-19 diagnostics.


Assuntos
Anticorpos Antivirais/imunologia , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/imunologia , Imunoensaio , Imunoglobulina G/imunologia , Imunoglobulina M/imunologia , Medições Luminescentes , SARS-CoV-2/imunologia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anticorpos Antivirais/sangue , Automação Laboratorial , COVID-19/virologia , Feminino , Humanos , Imunoensaio/métodos , Imunoensaio/normas , Imunoglobulina G/sangue , Imunoglobulina M/sangue , Medições Luminescentes/métodos , Medições Luminescentes/normas , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Curva ROC , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Sensibilidade e Especificidade
2.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis ; 81(2): 132-4, 2015 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25533616

RESUMO

Performance of Vitek2, Etest, and TREK broth microdilution (BMD) panels was evaluated versus reference CLSI BMD for gentamicin susceptibility testing with 57 bloodstream isolates of KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae. Compared with reference BMD, the Essential Agreement and Categorical Agreement for TREK panels, Vitek2, and Etest were 91.2%, 31.6%, and 61.4%, respectively, and 86%, 21%, and 52.6%, respectively. Four very major discrepancies occurred with Vitek2. In these 4 strains, gentamicin resistance was associated with the presence of an armA aminoglycoside resistance determinant.


Assuntos
Antibacterianos/farmacologia , Proteínas de Bactérias/metabolismo , Erros de Diagnóstico , Gentamicinas/farmacologia , Klebsiella pneumoniae/efeitos dos fármacos , Klebsiella pneumoniae/enzimologia , beta-Lactamases/metabolismo , Automação Laboratorial/métodos , Bacteriemia/microbiologia , Humanos , Infecções por Klebsiella/microbiologia , Testes de Sensibilidade Microbiana/métodos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA